Power factor correction in single phase AC-DC conversion: control circuits for performance optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AC-DC conversion with power factor correction may use several well known power circuits (boost, half-bridge and full-bridge), or some single stage converters, in the case of switch mode power supplies. All of them present the same control problem: an accurate control of the input current and the simultaneous control of the voltage across the energy storage capacitor. The control of the voltage at the storage capacitor presents a high response time or a reduced gain, in order to avoid a significant distortion of the input current, with a dominant harmonic at the double of line frequency. In the case of switch mode power supplies, the storage capacitor is designed to perform a required stand-on time and, consequently, is bulky and expensive. This paper presents a survey of the more recent pulse width modulators used in the PFC circuits, namely UCI modulators and the design objectives of those control circuits and their main limitations. It is also presented a new technique for capacitor voltage sampling that permit an important reduction of the response time of the voltage regulators. The stability conditions for PI regulators with sampled feedback are presented. Experimental results obtained with a full-bridge single stage converter are also presented.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".